In terms of color, and which I prefer, personally I like the straight RGB rendition.
But I think it is helpful to think about color (and contrast and brightness and just about any other parameter we control) in terms of information being conveyed. Is this particular presentation of the data particularly good at showing some aspect of the object?
The Hubble Palette is not popular so much because it renders beautiful colors (the original Hubble Palette pictures were rather unpleasing in some aspects like the magenta stars). Rather it is popular because it tells you something easily interpreted about what emissions are coming from where. I can look at a hubble palette image and immediately tell where there is relatively more and less oxygen (or more and less sulfur), etc.
We stretch the heck out of the saturation in galaxies, yes because in part we have learned to like that presentation, but just as importantly, it helps highlight where there are many young very hot blue stars, or a higher concentration of cooler stars.
When we use Ha and add it to galaxies, it may improve the looks for some (I typically detest it but that is me), but more importantly, it is highlighting where the Ha regions in the galaxy reside.
BTW, this is how I personally determine when some things are overdone. For example, when things get really saturated, then the colors actually start to posterize. At that point you are showing less information, not more. And so I personally think it is time to pull back on the saturation.
This is all IMO. There are users on Astrobin that are very very popular and have pushed the saturation to the point where it looks like a cartoon to me. Posterization of color is everywhere. People like it, and they didn't ask my opinion.
Edited by Madratter, 25 February 2020 - 04:30 PM.